SECESSION by James White

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 9, 1861

SECESSION.

By James White

BRo. SMITH: We conclude from present aspects that the name, "Seventh-day Adventists," is being made obligatory upon our brethren in present truth, and if so be that it is considered a test of fellowship and loyalty to the precious cause of truth, we most earnestly request Bro. and sister White to call a conference for Ohio at Gilboa, at their earliest convenience. This we deem necessary for the following reasons:

1. Without farther light Ohio cannot submit to the name, Seventh-day Adventists, as either a test, or an appropriate name for God's people.

2. Being appointed a finance committee at the last conference, and having now on hand means for carrying on the cause in Ohio, we could not conscientiously expend those means in any other than the advancement and extension of the truth and church of God.

3. If such means are to be expended otherwise, it will be necessary for the churches in Ohio to assemble in conference and give instructions to that effect, and also choose some other committee to make the disbursements.

Let this conference be at the earliest convenience, leaving it to Bro. White to fix the definite time, and give notice of the same in Review. Friends in Ohio, as far as known, earnestly desire Bro. and sister White to attend this conference. Their expenses will all be attended to, both to and from Ohio.

J. DUDLEY, L. E. JONES, J. P. FLEMING, Finance Committee for Ohio.

REMARKS.—Who are making the name "a test of fellowship and loyalty to the precious cause of truth?" Read the above again and you will see. As Bro. and sister White know of no one in Michigan, or anywhere else, excepting one or more in Gilboa, Ohio, they, of course, have no conference to appoint and attend in Gilboa at present according to conditions stated above.

The Battle Creek conference, October 1, 1860, voted, "That we call ourselves Seventh-day Adventists," one brother from Gilboa dissenting. The brethren

generally, as far as we can learn, are adopting the name, and we never heard of, or thought of its being made a test until we read the above from Gilboa.

The Ohio finance committee were appointed to collect and disburse means for the extension of the truth and church of God. A good work indeed—Why not go forward? The North electing Abraham Lincoln to the presidency is not a sufficient cause for Southern States to secede from the Union. Neither because the body of believers in the third message do not egotistically assume the name Church of God, as though God had no other names in his great church book in heaven but theirs, is no reason why a few persons in Gilboa, or anywhere else, should stir up a secession movement to make the name Church of God a test. As this matter is not fully developed, we wait to see if our friends in Gilboa do call a convention and pass secession ordinances, making a name a test. Meanwhile it would be well for the old friends of the cause in Ohio to report themselves to the General Conference at Battle Creek.

We will here add, that as a friend in Gilboa complains of the non-publication of an article from Gilboa, setting forth the evidences in favor of the name Church of God, we wish to say that at that time no one connected with the Review Office objected to the name. The only objection to the article at that time was that it held up the views of worthy brethren in a false light.